there are a lot of grown ups out in the world who have looked at IP law in general and, while perhaps accepting that there are occasional absurdities and oddities around the edges that do need to be worked out, have concluded that it is fundamentally good.
Isn't that the very problem the parent was describing? The judiciary should not be concluding that particular laws are fundamentally good, but applying them indifferently.
If nothing else, more law guarantees more work, so an impartial judiciary would not even celebrate the existence of some body of law.
if you "fix" your car to let more people ride in it by modifying
A WiFi router is not like a car. It is not a deadly box zooming around at 30+ mph. Its usage is not regulated by licence.
the quick start guide
Never seen a "blaming the victim" section in a manual for a wireless router.
OMFG, requiring that someone either know the law
Ignorance of the law is not being plead, merely its nitwittedness.
Yeah, I hope you hate it, we don't need any more arrogant pricks, we just got rid of Palin to tour the lower 48, and we don't need you coming up to fill the void of ignorance left behi
Hey, thanks for showing me how she managed to get elected in the first place.
You are a dullard. I shall not be reading any further response.
But the jury does not decide questions of law, the case is at first instance, and Apple are not required to bring proceedings anyway, so your post demonstrates a pedestrian lack of both understanding and useful content.
If by "lazy and inept" you mean "anyone who wants to temporarily give access to a group of other people" or "anyone who finds out that WiFi devices don't always interoperate with all the security turned on" or "anyone who doesn't buy modern equipment first hand" (my WiFi equipment from 10 years ago still works fine), then yes, "lazy and inept".
Since we're illegalising lazy and inept, can I bring a private prosecution against you for your lazy, inept argument? I was hoping you had something clever, but it turns out you're just another "everyone should be an expert in the narrow fields in which I know stuff" dork.
tl;dr You're making it hard for me to learn to love Alaska...
So what you're saying is that Samsung's 'phones were dressed provocatively and Samsung was asking for it.
(OK, what's you're actually saying is that you have a qusi-religious devotion to Apple, or shares that you want to be maintained as ridiculously high as possible, but I'm trying to imagine you as having more of a character.)
Or maybe you misconfigured your server, or forgot that you had shared a folder which you later use for storage. Maybe you chose a password so obvious that it is effectively null, not thinking/knowing that a stranger could access your local network.
That would be negligent.
And you had said:
there hasn't really been a circumstance where the p2p user might have "accidentally left a drive open".
To clarify in English law: intent requires the outcome to have been your purpose in doing whatever. What you might be describing is subjective recklessness, i.e. you do something even though you are aware of a risk of the outcome. For example, if you throw stones around glass houses and you break glass, you could still be guilty of criminal damage - but the breakage was clearly an accident.
Of course, the typical clueless user may have no idea of the risk.
If I fail to maintain my vehicle and I crash it into your garden fence because the brakes failed I am still responsible.
In Anglo-Saxon law, it seems you're now getting at the civil tort of negligence, based on duty of care. This is something different.
No, we're not. According to the article the acquisition of copyrighted works was done by a member of the household (the account holder's wife)
So you're saying that there's no excuse for not being so clued up about security as to prevent your own wife from accessing stuff via your wireless? Wow, man, that's... odd.
Please remember that this was a third strike penalty, so notice had been given.
So he was already found guilty twice in a court of law by criminal standards?
And for those who keep modding down this fine AC, Derbyshire was one of the most well-known and innovative workers at the Radiophonic Workshop, and both are links to her work. Sigh.
Oh, her original was so good. The later themes didn't sound as good.
Am I going to be the first person to say that, while you may be able to get perfect precision with digital synthesis, you're always likely to get something more interesting to the human ear by playing around with analogue tech.
Also...
In a live performance at 2004's London Jazz Festival, he drove a tank over a replica of a meal Nigella Lawson had cooked for Tony Blair and George Bush.
Yawnity yawn yawn. Art may be subjective, but that doesn't mean I don't get to think some of it's just shit.
Going to have to be a bit more specific than that - your assertion would be at least contrary to ECHR art.6(2). Perhaps you mean that a prima facie case shifts the burden onto the defendant?
there hasn't really been a circumstance where the p2p user might have "accidentally left a drive open"
Windows share? NFS? FTP? Vulnerable machine, perhaps not updated properly? We're assuming someone borrowing yer wireless, yes? It sounds like you're saying that there is no way a home user could leave files available to anyone within 100 metres unless he tries, and that just ain't so.
I didn't make any claims about self representation, so your attempt to take me to task for this is a straw man argument.
You are unnecessarily confrontational. I was making a general point that people should not feel helpless when confronting the law.
Having said that, conspiracies about a gravy train for lawyers just disempower the individual. It's not the greedy legal opportunists who are moving the pieces.
English familiarity, here, though US not wildly different. I know very little French beyond what's common to EU law - if you are right, it is interesting! though it would also be necessary to see whether French law admits multiple counts of the same offence spaced apart in time...
Until you've accidentally left a drive open containing your legitimate collection of 5,000 MP3s amassed over the last decade.
We cannot excuse stupid laws by being hopeful that the sentence is lenient, or that the executive may have mercy.
As to lawyers... while I do speak as someone with some legal education, if you honestly don't think you can get anywhere representing yourself then a lawyer's lied to you. (And, as you may be able to tell, having representation may not get you any further - indeed, it'll only mean that the judge is more strict about you getting your shit right. (But don't do anything without taking some legal advice, for which you should always find the most experienced lawyer for precisely the shit you're in.))
Don't people have regular incomes? Anyway, you mostly need the attention of the guys at the top, no? Buy the ear of the people who matter. Sponsor the presidential campaigns, &c.
It's worked in the EU, kinda. Government is cheap. And some of them would enjoy the attention they get from going against the grain - if they'd just wanted money, they'd have stayed in business.
apk, I have the "utmost respect" for people regardless of their "background", as such...
but I have a question => as follows:
Could you please tell me why your posts: * are written like this *
HB
With lots of paragraphs comprising long sentences & punctuation! and the occasional bit of emphasis?... it reminds me of a friend I had who was "recovering" from a drug addiction and he would go off on these long and somewhat incoherent rambles...
He wasn't "stupid" <= by any stretch of the imagination but you could tell that he was having trouble sorting out thoughts (or at least expressing them (etc.))!
Anyway, it is a simple question: why do you write with this style?
It gives me this feeling like when I sit next to the guy on the bus who clearly can't cope very well and you know he's harmless but you wonder exactly what made him like this and you want to ask him but you are worried he might get attached and * well you know * next thing you'll be inviting him to your house and it's hard to be a good HOST (if you know what I mean)..
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be dull. The problem isn't that Intel may decide not to support Linux but that Intel may be creating a vertical agreement with Microsoft, viz.:
Intel said Clover Trail 'is a Windows 8 chip'
there are a lot of grown ups out in the world who have looked at IP law in general and, while perhaps accepting that there are occasional absurdities and oddities around the edges that do need to be worked out, have concluded that it is fundamentally good.
Isn't that the very problem the parent was describing? The judiciary should not be concluding that particular laws are fundamentally good, but applying them indifferently.
If nothing else, more law guarantees more work, so an impartial judiciary would not even celebrate the existence of some body of law.
Are you arguing that someone having suffered sexual assault would object to the promotion of a principle of not blaming the victim?
Well my Tetris watch is still computing meaninglessly.
No, I lie, I think I traded it in nineteen eighty-something. Can't remember for what, though. I hope it was good. I miss that watch.
if you "fix" your car to let more people ride in it by modifying
A WiFi router is not like a car. It is not a deadly box zooming around at 30+ mph. Its usage is not regulated by licence.
the quick start guide
Never seen a "blaming the victim" section in a manual for a wireless router.
OMFG, requiring that someone either know the law
Ignorance of the law is not being plead, merely its nitwittedness.
Yeah, I hope you hate it, we don't need any more arrogant pricks, we just got rid of Palin to tour the lower 48, and we don't need you coming up to fill the void of ignorance left behi
Hey, thanks for showing me how she managed to get elected in the first place.
You are a dullard. I shall not be reading any further response.
Hmm. Which side should I give more credence to?
Woz, of course.
But the jury does not decide questions of law, the case is at first instance, and Apple are not required to bring proceedings anyway, so your post demonstrates a pedestrian lack of both understanding and useful content.
So Samsung's buddy Google warned Samsung to put some different clothes on, and that makes what Apple did OK. Gotcha.
If by "lazy and inept" you mean "anyone who wants to temporarily give access to a group of other people" or "anyone who finds out that WiFi devices don't always interoperate with all the security turned on" or "anyone who doesn't buy modern equipment first hand" (my WiFi equipment from 10 years ago still works fine), then yes, "lazy and inept".
Since we're illegalising lazy and inept, can I bring a private prosecution against you for your lazy, inept argument? I was hoping you had something clever, but it turns out you're just another "everyone should be an expert in the narrow fields in which I know stuff" dork.
tl;dr You're making it hard for me to learn to love Alaska...
So what you're saying is that Samsung's 'phones were dressed provocatively and Samsung was asking for it.
(OK, what's you're actually saying is that you have a qusi-religious devotion to Apple, or shares that you want to be maintained as ridiculously high as possible, but I'm trying to imagine you as having more of a character.)
No it isn't. Stop thinking like a perfect geek.
My Psion Series 3a computed "meaningfully" on a couple of AA batteries for days.
Your expression is as giddy as your message apocryphal.
Making these shared is a deliberate act.
Or maybe you misconfigured your server, or forgot that you had shared a folder which you later use for storage. Maybe you chose a password so obvious that it is effectively null, not thinking/knowing that a stranger could access your local network.
That would be negligent.
And you had said:
there hasn't really been a circumstance where the p2p user might have "accidentally left a drive open".
To clarify in English law: intent requires the outcome to have been your purpose in doing whatever. What you might be describing is subjective recklessness, i.e. you do something even though you are aware of a risk of the outcome. For example, if you throw stones around glass houses and you break glass, you could still be guilty of criminal damage - but the breakage was clearly an accident.
Of course, the typical clueless user may have no idea of the risk.
If I fail to maintain my vehicle and I crash it into your garden fence because the brakes failed I am still responsible.
In Anglo-Saxon law, it seems you're now getting at the civil tort of negligence, based on duty of care. This is something different.
No, we're not. According to the article the acquisition of copyrighted works was done by a member of the household (the account holder's wife)
So you're saying that there's no excuse for not being so clued up about security as to prevent your own wife from accessing stuff via your wireless? Wow, man, that's... odd.
Please remember that this was a third strike penalty, so notice had been given.
So he was already found guilty twice in a court of law by criminal standards?
The man failed to control his wife,
Sir, what is wrong with your country?
And for those who keep modding down this fine AC, Derbyshire was one of the most well-known and innovative workers at the Radiophonic Workshop, and both are links to her work. Sigh.
Oh, her original was so good. The later themes didn't sound as good.
Am I going to be the first person to say that, while you may be able to get perfect precision with digital synthesis, you're always likely to get something more interesting to the human ear by playing around with analogue tech.
Also...
In a live performance at 2004's London Jazz Festival, he drove a tank over a replica of a meal Nigella Lawson had cooked for Tony Blair and George Bush.
Yawnity yawn yawn. Art may be subjective, but that doesn't mean I don't get to think some of it's just shit.
Going to have to be a bit more specific than that - your assertion would be at least contrary to ECHR art.6(2). Perhaps you mean that a prima facie case shifts the burden onto the defendant?
there hasn't really been a circumstance where the p2p user might have "accidentally left a drive open"
Windows share? NFS? FTP? Vulnerable machine, perhaps not updated properly? We're assuming someone borrowing yer wireless, yes? It sounds like you're saying that there is no way a home user could leave files available to anyone within 100 metres unless he tries, and that just ain't so.
I didn't make any claims about self representation, so your attempt to take me to task for this is a straw man argument.
You are unnecessarily confrontational. I was making a general point that people should not feel helpless when confronting the law.
Having said that, conspiracies about a gravy train for lawyers just disempower the individual. It's not the greedy legal opportunists who are moving the pieces.
English familiarity, here, though US not wildly different. I know very little French beyond what's common to EU law - if you are right, it is interesting! though it would also be necessary to see whether French law admits multiple counts of the same offence spaced apart in time...
Until you've accidentally left a drive open containing your legitimate collection of 5,000 MP3s amassed over the last decade.
We cannot excuse stupid laws by being hopeful that the sentence is lenient, or that the executive may have mercy.
As to lawyers... while I do speak as someone with some legal education, if you honestly don't think you can get anywhere representing yourself then a lawyer's lied to you. (And, as you may be able to tell, having representation may not get you any further - indeed, it'll only mean that the judge is more strict about you getting your shit right. (But don't do anything without taking some legal advice, for which you should always find the most experienced lawyer for precisely the shit you're in.))
No, it's advocating violence against men - which, my political correctness compass tells me, is absolutely fine.
150 euro fine, in fact.
ACL's which MAC is basically an analog of
P.S. => ++ACL is an anagram of MAC.
Don't people have regular incomes? Anyway, you mostly need the attention of the guys at the top, no? Buy the ear of the people who matter. Sponsor the presidential campaigns, &c.
It's worked in the EU, kinda. Government is cheap. And some of them would enjoy the attention they get from going against the grain - if they'd just wanted money, they'd have stayed in business.
Why do nerds raise $100ks on kickstarter for computer games, but not the equivalent to lobby government to repeal stupid patent laws?
It would have a much more positive effect on software development in the long run, you know...
apk, I have the "utmost respect" for people regardless of their "background", as such...
but I have a question => as follows:
Could you please tell me why your posts: * are written like this *
HB
With lots of paragraphs comprising long sentences & punctuation! and the occasional bit of emphasis? ... it reminds me of a friend I had who was "recovering" from a drug addiction and he would go off on these long and somewhat incoherent rambles ...
He wasn't "stupid" <= by any stretch of the imagination but you could tell that he was having trouble sorting out thoughts (or at least expressing them (etc.))!
Anyway, it is a simple question: why do you write with this style?
It gives me this feeling like when I sit next to the guy on the bus who clearly can't cope very well and you know he's harmless but you wonder exactly what made him like this and you want to ask him but you are worried he might get attached and * well you know * next thing you'll be inviting him to your house and it's hard to be a good HOST (if you know what I mean)..
Why is it troll? This is obviously a marketing piece. Even the summary arbitrarily slips in "The Windows 8 maker"!